Apologies then, I evidently missed the context of that. I’ll keep my post there because it’s true for most other tiers though.
I’d still love to see where cqc is better for Russia / the reload is better.
The only example I can truly say that is the case, is the T-34-57s, even then, Germany gets an up armored one with the short 76 I believe?
Nope nope nope. Tiger 2 at 7.0BR is just cursed and would ruin Germanys whole 6.7 Line Up which is already just constant +1 Uptiers always facing 7.3/.7.7 US and USSR Vehicles all the time
All the 6.7 Vehicles should remain at 6.7 imho. It might not sound much to move them up by only 0.3 but thats a huge jump in Tech/Armour etc at 7BR and then going to encounter 8 / 8.3 Vehicles some of which already get Thermals, LRF and APFSDS, ATGMs…and then you might end up running into Helis and way stronger Planes too…
1 Like
6.7 commonly sees 7.0 or 7.3, or it’s own br
Your point being? And at 7.0 / 7.3 those former 6.7 are going to run into 8.0 / 8.3 Vehicles, some having Thermals, LRF, APFSDS, ATGMs, Helis, stronger Planes…thats a massive jump
Not to forget it would make them guaranteed to constantly just encounter further advanced Cold War Vehicles and even early 2000s Vehicles like the VIDAR nullifying all their strengths and completely outperforming them unless you manage to get an Downtier
1 Like
Wow so exactly what happens to an IS6?
Also, please point out which vehicle is:
Stabalized, has thermals, and a LRF, and APFSDS at 8.0
I’ll wait.
There are multiple vehicles that have one or multiple of those traits. I’m not certain if there’s a vehicle that has all, but Dadadudu was fairly obviously not saying the 6.7s would be facing a vehicle that has all of these, but that 6.7s facing vehicles with even some of these is too much.
If you put every nation on a scale of CQC vs Sniping, where does Russia come out?
The only country that might be more CQC based than Russia is the US, and considering Russia’s apparent aversion to long-range weapons and equipment and habit of designing tanks on the concept of “we don’t need good optics if we drive closer”, I have some doubts on that.
The IS-6 can face 8.7s… so can the IS-4M
Funnily enough, I found out recently, the Maus cam Bounce rounds from a T-72A
Funnily enough, I found out recently, the Maus cam Bounce rounds from a T-72A
Can does not mean will, much like your imagined point that “the Marder can bounce APFSDS”.
The IS-6 can face 8.7s… so can the IS-4M
The difference is that, because these are heavy tanks with incredibly good armour, downtiering them will put them against many tanks that are wholly incapable of killing them. While them being uptiered in the manner described is far from ideal, it is also far preferable to sending them against such pathetically weaker opponents (which is the same logic on which the Maus is balanced, despite its numerous disadvantages when in any kind of uptier).
1 Like
Next time it happens, I will record it and send it to you.
I played the is-6 earlier to test how bad it was, I was surprised.
I got 8 kills.
7 were press W USA mains uptiering lower br tanks for no reason.
1 was a USA f80 or something that flew in the straightest line I’ve seen. Pilot sniper him.
At 400 meters I somehow bounced off the side of the T29’s turret on a good angle too.
Guess what killed me? An M41a1 (side shot) and a T26e1 at a super high AoA on the gunner optic.
Next time it happens, I will record it and send it to you.
You may feel free to do so. I will watch it, laugh, and move on, the same as I do anytime I see someone being randomly Gaijined.
I’ve seen clips of Tiger 2 88s bouncing on T-34s and (low-tier) Sherman turrets. Does that mean T-34s and Shermans need be moved to 6.7? Listing cases like this as actual points to be considered in a debate ranges somewhere between disingenuous and farcical.
2 Likes
It states 6 seconds for even T-64B/A or original T-64. So basically all MZ’s should be 6
1 Like
I love BMP3, but this is a dumb and stupid comparison. Begleit is as good as it is because of the 40mm and its utility as a secondary SPAA with its HE-VT. BMP3 can SPAA minimally with its auto cannon, but no where near the scale of the Begleit. Yeah, the BMP3 has a much better missile - but also a hefty reload for it. And if you want to talk ATGM, you’ll have a better time with actual slingers like the AFT09.
Ammo boxes exist now, but yes - I’d take Falcon over all those small ammo APDS machines. However, ltPsV Leopard is the best out of all of those machines all round. Its mobility and survivability combined with the cannon. It really is a joy to use, and it’s no surprise that guy was doing the quickest to nuke challenge in it. If only considering SPAA potential - give me PGZ09.
Penetration-wise, still enjoyable to use for its all around usability - especially a good reload rate. I love using that tank. But I’m also someone who plays 6.7 USA just for the UFO tank goodness. Typically I bring the UFO as a first spawn and then the E5. In an uptier, the E5 is a no-go, so I’ll bring other tanks with better uptier potential. However, at its own BR the E5 is an absolute monster. It’s fine at 6.7, due to this. Any movement of the E5 up to 7 or beyond will simply kill the tank. If any move is going to be made for USA (and other trees with M26) around that BR, it’s to move the M26 down to 6.3 where it belongs. It has no business being the same BR as E5.
Exactly. And anyone who has played this game knows that you can bounce off anything if you try hard enough and the Gaijin gods want it to. However, one place that the T-72A is not going to bounce is the Maus’s turret cheek, and the Maus will go down. It’s how you dispatch of the Maus easily using vehicles like the Foch. Maus is enjoyable to use, but that’s not because it bounces most things. Like the 279, its true strength lies in its survivability. However, that turret cheek brings it undone easily and often - armour-wise and survivability-wise. But if the T-72 is out there thinking he is king-ding-a-ling and can just shoot with no care for where the shot lands…
1 Like
Or hear me.out here.
Rather than recompress a bunch of stuff, more decompression.
None of these need to move realistically until we get decompression.
Centurion 10 at 8.0 as well as all the others on sweden and isreal are fine.
They sacrifice mobility majorly and are lacking good protection.
T54s are fine as well same as the leopard 1, amx 30s.wtc
2 Likes
I’ll be honest here lot of these suggestions are terrible. Most vehicles are already in a good position balance wise. The only thing that should be done is cold war tiers should be decompressed and cold war vehicles from ww2 ranks should be upped in BR to at least mitigate all the HEATFS slinging in ww2 tiers people complain about. Something like the M44 has no place in 4.0. It’s easily a 6.0 vehicle while the cold war howitzers could go to 7.0.
1 Like
For context the maus was reversing faster than my T-72a wanted to go, so I already knocked out his gunner and gun and thought a UFP shot would kill his driver, nope.
I agree with 90% of this.
But, the T26e5 should by all means be a 7.0, it has better armor than even the T29.
If the T26e1 stays put, then there will be a 6.7, and the jumbo with the long 76 will be 6.3
The m26 could become a 6.3, I don’t see anything too crazy about that.
But the m26T99 should stay at 6.7
Same with the m26e1? (The long barreled one).
I cannot and will not ever agree with the T-54s being 7.7-8.0 they’re beyond bad even for an 7.3, but when a version of them can see 9.0??? It’s crazy.
Only agreeable thing on this list from my biased and unchanging standpoint
no, just no. If you, a 6.7 player, do not know how to kill the E5 then you need to just quit. The only thing the E5 has going for it that could warrant an idea of the Armor being 7.3-Worthy is the fact that the M26 is near identical with less armor. If we want to talk weakspots, the T26E5 has nearly the same weak spots as a Tiger II (P), minus a somewhat weaker front.
The reason said APS doesn’t work is cause Shtora is pretty much a “lookammy wed eyes!” and less of a reasonable APS especially seeing as you have to look the missile dead in the eyes and hope to god it’s a jammable missile. The reason it doesn’t work at its BR is because the missiles that it would jam are so far outdated, we’d be talking a 11.0-8.3 BR decrease for it to make sense. If you’re hoping for a mobile tank with a good reload you literally should not be playing USSR. Mind you, the T 80 U (Swedish Squadron Vehicle) with less armor, no APS, and it’s best round being the 3BM42 (Which is a surprisingly baller round despite its off-putting pen value), is at 11.3 and it sees countless downtiers to 10.7. Lowering the BR of the T-90A would literally do nothing except shove it somewhere it doesn’t belong.
As much as I hate dying to Gepards, simply no. maybe 8.7 but tossing it at 9.0 puts it .7 BR lower than it’s better counterpart, the Gepard 1A2
Might I introduce you to the goofy Swede (Den Bandkanon)
[Yes I know you mentioned it]
Loud Incorect Buzzer
The ItPsV Leopard (Which has a really long and fun name in Finnish) is simply just not a Gepard. Theres a reason that after Leopard in the ingame title it says “Marksman”. It’s the British Marksman turret on a Leopard 2A4 Hull. It’s a sacrilegious amalgam but that just does not mean it should be 9.3 without raising the Chieftain Marksman either.
All in all stop recommending furthering the compression of BRs
2 Likes
Yet the leopard 1 can too.
Oh the amx30 which has no access to apds, aphe, apbc either.
T54 is a victim of compression same as all the other 8.0s.
It has a better profile and armour than any 8.0
A caveat, every single 8.0 gets stomped by 9.0s its how it is.
The t54 is an 8.0 tank statistically speaking.
1 Like